Wooooo Hooooo Go BPH :)$$$$$$, page-26214

Well here we go.... MK is out and about again!... This is about Carbon Capture (offshore) and something about Apprehended Bias?!?!?!

JOURNALIST: Now, carbon capture and storage, let's start on that one. In your view is it a critical component of emissions reduction?

MINISTER MADELEINE KING: I think it is, and it's not just me that thinks it is. The International Energy Agency has said carbon capture and storage will be essential for the world to get to net zero because of the challenge ahead, like there is a lot of carbon, there is a lot of carbon intensive industries right around the world. And so that is an important technology that will be needed to be able to sequester carbon into the future.

JOURNALIST: But it isn't shared by all of your Cabinet though, is it?

MINISTER MADELEINE KING: I would think it's shared by all the Cabinet, but there are different views around the country, for sure, and I don't object to those different views, but I tend to follow the ‑ well, I absolutely follow the science, and I don't mind that advice, the International Energy Agency which points to CCS quite clearly. There's one facility in Western Australia, it's an offshore facility that has already sequestered 9 million tonnes of carbon dioxide, so that's a whole lot of emissions that is put back into our reservoir that was able to hold gas before and it's now holding a different kind of gas. So it will be an important tool, but the most important tool is to reduce the emissions in the first place. This is one of those means of making sure we reduce the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, so that we can cool the planet.

JOURNALIST: If we look at Glencore, Great Artesian Basin and obviously a massive stoush at the moment going on. Where do you stand?

MINISTER MADELEINE KING: Well, it's not helpful for ministers in the Federal Government to interject and put personal opinions on these cases. It is before the courts. We saw there are two resources based decisions of the last government that ended up in the courts and the decisions of government were dismissed because of apprehended bias. So it's not really, it's not helpful for me to interject in that debate, and so I won't on the specifics of that. But I do understand people's concerns, and I understand what Glencore is trying to achieve as well. When we have this contested land use, it really is ‑ it's a difficult thing, and it's not going to end, so the way in which you speak about things is going to be important, about how we ‑ what we have to do to reduce emissions on one hand and then the other uses of land that we absolutely need for, you know, prime agricultural land. So I think a sensible debate about CCS and where it is, people should be able to lodge their objections. I note the approval was from the former government. It will go through the courts, and I guess we'll, you know, we will see where it goes.